Do incidents from the past affect the present?

Do incidents from the past continue to influence the present?

 

Incidents from the past continue to influence the present. Whether they are actual physical repercussions of the past, or an effect caused by the memories, the events that have happened in our past affect us here and now.

The past can have physical repercussions on the future. If someone spilled a can of nuclear waste fluid 10 years ago, people in the present who were affected by then will still be affected by it now, because contact or proximity with nuclear waste causes very serious medical problems; cancer, for instance. If someone lost their arm 50 years ago, they’d still have repercussions from that today, regardless of whether they replaced their missing arm with a fake one or not. There can be no disputing the fact that what we have done in our past affects our physical health in the present. That is simply one of the basic laws of Time. But what about political and social implications? This seems to be the focus of the question asked, rather than the undeniably obvious implications of medical and physical actions.

What about wars? Should Germany be treated differently now because of their attempt at global domination in the past? Should America be treated differently because our government used to be based off of Judeo-Christian values? Should the choices that groups of bodies made in the past affect the way we treat those bodies now? I believe that they should only be treated according to their past as long as they behave in the same way as they did then. If Germany still had an obsession with “perfecting” the world through military power, then by all means, we should treat them the same way as we did in the World War that they started. If the government of America still founded their laws and standards based off of biblical principles, then they should be treated the same way now as they were treated when they were founded. However, when you look at that reasoning, you see that while you are treating them the same way that they were treated historically, you are still treating them based on their present actions. In the end, when you apply that principle to general actions and beliefs, both sides of the argument agree with each other. But what about specific actions? Would it be right to treat a person or group of people differently based on a specific action they did in the past? The principle stated above applies better in this case. With regard to Germany, we would only treat them as a hostile entity if we believed them capable of committing the same atrocities again that they committed in the war. This is not based on their present actions, because we have already determined that that is a circular argument, but it is based on an informed decision based on the fact that we know for certain what they would do if their desires came to fruition (I am not implying in any way that Germany currently still holds these views). Same thing with America. While it is a circular argument to reason that we should treat them the same way as we did in history simply because they believe and act the same way now as they did in history (again, I am not implying they do), the principle applies to specific situations. We now know that IF they believe the same way now as they did before the American Civil War, then we know with a good deal of certainty that if some of the States were to attempt to break away from the nation, then the National Government would use military force to prevent it, and both foreign and local entities should treat them accordingly. This is NOT a circular argument, because we are using facts that we have learned in history to make better-informed decisions in our present actions.

The past actions of a group of individuals such as a nation does, or should, affect the way we treat them in the present, but only in regard to specific cases, as compared to general application. In addition, the past actions of individuals that affected their physical person can and do affect their present actions and way of living.